Music and the Christian

Jerry Solomon

Music is a pervasive part of contemporary culture. We hear it on
elevators, in restaurants, on telephones while we wait for our
party to answer, in offices, in hotel lobbies, and in virtually
every corner of contemporary life. In fact, it permeates the
airwaves so thoroughly we often do not realize it is there.
Television uses music not only in musical programs but also in
commercials and program soundtracks. Movies also utilize music to
enhance the events shown on the screen. Radio offers a wide variety
of music around the clock. The availability of recordings allows us
to program music to suit our own listening tastes, and we can hear
them in virtually any location. Concerts, especially in large
cities, offer a potpourri of music to choose from.

There is also a wide variety of musical genres. Rock (with its
assortment of styles and labels), rap, country and western, jazz,
Broadway, folk, classical, New Age, and gospel provide us with a
dizzying assortment of listening and performing options.
Such permeation and variety provide us with a unique opportunity to
practice discernment. Some may think this is unnecessary because
they claim to listen only to "Christian" music. Nevertheless, the
broader population of the evangelical community spends innumerable
hours absorbing music, whether "Christian" or "secular."

Why should a Christian be interested and involved in the arts,
music in particular? In his excellent work Theology and
Contemporary Art Forms, John Newport lists several helpful
points:

The first reason Christians should be interested in the arts is
related to the biblical teaching that God reveals and carries on
his redemptive purpose in time and history. The Christian community
...cannot cut itself off from the characteristic artistic
vitalities of history--past and present. Second...the arts give a
peculiarly direct access to the distinctive tone, concerns, and
feelings of a culture.... The artists not only mirror their age in
its subtlest nuances, but they generally do it a generation ahead
of more abstract and theoretical thinkers. Third...the arts focus
(in a remarkably vivid and startling way) on the vital issues and
themes which are the central concern of theology. Fourth...the arts
spell out dramatically the implications of various world views.(1)

The second, third, and fourth points are especially applicable
to music. If music mirrors culture, if it tells us of important
issues and themes; and if it shows the implications of various
world views, it can tell us a great deal about our culture.
Lyrically, music can be used as a medium for criticism,
commendation, reflection, questioning, rebellion, and any number of
other thoughts or emotions. When the musical language is employed
to relay these thoughts or emotions the result can be significant.

History is replete with examples of the ways music has been
vitally employed in various cultures. One of the more prominent
examples of this can be found in the Psalms, where lyrics were
merged with music to form a strategic voice for Israel's life. The
same is true in contemporary life. The themes of rock, rap, and
country music demonstrate how music can be a notable voice for the
spirit of a culture, whether for good or evil.

In order to affect our culture we must listen to that voice. We
must hear its questions and be sensitive to the needs that cry out
for the answers God provides.

Can Music Be "Christian"?

One of the continuing debates among evangelicals centers on how
music is to be judged. Some say there is a particular musical style
that is distinctly Christian. Others reject such a proposition.
Some believe that certain musical styles are intrinsically evil.
Others reject this. The examples of such conflict are numerous. It
is important that we join the dialogue. In the process we will
observe several ways we should respond to the music of our culture.

First, the term "Christian music" is a misnomer. Music cannot be
declared Christian because of particular ingredients. There is no
special Christian musical vocabulary. There is no distinctive sound
that makes a piece of music Christian. The only part of a
composition that can make it Christian is the lyrics. In view of
the fact that such phrases as "contemporary Christian music" are in
vogue, this is a meaningful observation. Perhaps the phrase
"contemporary Christian lyrics" would be more appropriate. Of
course, the lyrics may be suspect doctrinally and ethically, and
they may be of poor quality, but my point is concentrated on the
musical content.

It is possible that misunderstandings regarding "Christian
music" are the product of cultural bias. Our "western ears" are
accustomed to certain sounds. Particular modes, scales, and rhythms
are part of a rich musical heritage. When we hear music that is not
part of that heritage we are tempted to label it, inaccurately, as
unfit for a Christian's musical life.

We should realize that music is best understood within its
culture. For example, the classical music of India includes quarter
tones, which are foreign to our ears. They generally sound very
strange to us, and they are often played on instruments that have
a strange sound, such as the sitar. But we would be guilty of
flagrant prejudice if we were to maintain that such music is un-
Christian because it does not contain the tones we are used to
hearing. Another example of the way evangelicals tend to misapply
the term Christian to music can be understood by reflecting on how
music may have sounded during biblical and church history. Scholars
have begun to demonstrate that the music of biblical history may
have been comprised of tonal and rhythmic qualities that were very
different from what we are accustomed to in western culture.

The attitudes of Luther and Calvin toward the use of music show
a disagreement concerning the truth of a particular Christian
style. Charles Garside provides intriguing insights:

Luther had openly proclaimed his desire to use all available
music, including the most obviously secular, for the worship of the
church. . . . Calvin, to the contrary, now absolutely rejects such
a deployment of existing musical resources.(2)

It is obvious that these great men did not agree on the nature
of music.

Our musical preconceptions do not die easily, and they seem to
recur periodically in church history. Once a style becomes familiar
enough, it is accepted. Until then, it is suspect. More recent
examples can be found in the controversies surrounding the use of
instruments such as drums and guitars during worship services.
Evangelicals need to be alert to their biases and understand that
"Christian music" is a misnomer.

The "Power" of Music

It is often claimed that music has "power" to manipulate and
control us. If this were true, Skinnerian determinism would be
correct in asserting that there is no such thing as personal choice
or responsibility. Music, along with other "powers" found in our
cultural settings, would be given credit that is not legitimate.

Best and Huttar address this by saying:

The fact that music, among other created and cultural
things, is purported by primitives and sophisticates alike to have
power is more a matter of the dislocation of priorities than
anything else.(3)

Such beliefs not only stimulate a "dislocation of priorities,"
they also stimulate poor theology.

The Bible tells us that early in their relationship David played
music for King Saul. On one occasion what Saul heard soothed him,
and on another occasion the same sounds infuriated him. In reality,
though, the reactions were Saul's decisions. He was not passive; he
was not being manipulated on either occasion by the "power" of the
music.

Much contemporary thinking places the blame for aberrant
behavior (sexual misconduct, rebellion, violence, etc.) on the
supposed intrinsic potency of music to orchestrate our actions.
Some extend this to the point of believing that music is the
special tool of Satan, so when such behavior is exhibited he is the
culprit. Again, Best and Huttar offer pertinent thoughts. They
write:

Ultimately the Judeo-Christian perspective maintains that man is
interiorly wrong and that until he is right he will place the blame
for his condition outside himself.(4)

Admittedly, my point is a subtle one. We must be careful not to
imply music cannot be used for evil purposes. But we must realize
that the devil goads people who use music; he does not empower the
music itself.

Current controversy among Christians concerning the rhythmic
content of rock music is an example of the tendency to believe that
some musical styles are intrinsically evil. For example, Steve
Lawhead has demonstrated that the music of the early slaves
probably did not include much rhythmic substance at all. The
plantation owners would not have allowed drums because they could
have been used to relay messages of revolt between the groups of
slaves. This observation is central to the issue of rock music,
because some assert that the syncopated rhythm of rock is the
product of the pagan African backgrounds of the slaves. In reality,
American slave music centered around the playing of a "banya," an
instrument akin to the banjo, and not drums or other rhythmic
instruments.(5)

Rock music is not intrinsically evil. It did not originate in a
pagan past, and even if it did that would not mean that it is evil.
Nevertheless, since it has been a prominent and influential part of
American culture for several decades, it demands the attention of
evangelicals. The attention it is given should begin with the
understanding that the problems that are a part of rock do not
reside in the music itself; they reside in sinful people who can
and often do abuse it. The same can be said about any musical
style, or any other art form.

The Quality of Music

So far I have asserted two propositions concerning how
Christians can respond to the music of their culture: the term
Christian music is a misnomer, and no musical style is
intrinsically evil. While both of these statements are true, they
say nothing about the quality of music we choose to make a part of
our lives. Thus my third proposition is that music should be
evaluated based on quality. A proposal that includes judgments of
quality is a challenging one. Evangelicals will find this
especially difficult, because the subject of aesthetics is not a
prevalent part of our heritage.

Evangelicals tend toward lazy thinking when it comes to
analyzing the music of their culture. As Frank Gaebelein said, "It
is more difficult to be thoughtfully discriminating than to fall
back upon sweeping generalization."(6) There are several factors to
be weighed if discriminating thought is to occur.

We should focus attention on the music within Christian life.
This applies not only to music used in worship, but also to music
heard via radio, CDs, concerts, and other sources.

Lack of quality is one of the themes of those who write about
contemporary church music. Harold Best states: "Contentment with
mediocrity as a would-be carrier of truth looms as a major
hindrance to true creative vision among evangelicals."(7) Robert
Elmore continues in a similar vein:

There are even ministers who feed their congregations
with the strong meat of the Word and at the same time surround
their preaching with only the skimmed milk of
music.(8)

If negative declarations such as these are the consensus of
those who have devoted ardent attention to the subject, what are
the contents of a positive model? The answers to this are numerous.
I will only relate some of the insights of one thinker, Calvin
Johansson.

The first insight refers to movement. Music must move:

The principle here is that music needs to exhibit a flow, an
overall feel for continuity, that moves progressively and
irresistibly from beginning to end. It is not intended to hammer
and drive a musical pulse into the mind.

This principle can be applied to the incessant nature of the
rock rhythm we have previously discussed. The second insight has to
do with cohesion:

Unity is an organic pull, a felt quality that permeates a
composition so thoroughly that every part, no matter how small, is
related.

The third insight relates to "diversions at various levels....
Without diversity there would only be sameness, a quality that
would be not only boring but also devastatingly static."

The fourth insight focuses on "the principle of dominance.... A
certain hierarchy of values is adopted by the composer in which
more important features are set against the less important." The
fifth insight shows that "every component part of a composition
needs to have intrinsic worth in and of itself.... The music
demonstrates truth as each part of the composition has
self-worth."(9)

These principles contain ideas that the non-musician might find
difficult to understand. Indeed, most of us are not accustomed to
using language to discuss the quality of the music we hear other
than to say we do or do not "like" it. But if we are going to
assess the music of the broader culture accurately, we must be able
to use such language to assess music within our own subculture. We
must seek quality there.

Pop Music

Another factor in musical discrimination applies to the way we
approach music outside our subculture. The Christian is free to
enter culture equipped with discernment, and this certainly applies
to music. We need not fear the music of our culture, but we must
exercise caution.

Assessments of quality also apply here. The Christian should use
the principles we discussed above to evaluate the music of the
broader culture.

We should also be aware of the blending of music and message, or
lack of it. The ideal situation occurs when both the medium and the
message agree.

Too often the music we hear conveys a message at the expense of
musical quality. Best explains:

The kind of mass communication on which the media
subsist depends on two things: a minimal creative element and a
perspective that sees music only as conveying a message rather than
being a message. Viewed as a carrier, music tends to be reduced to
a format equated with entertainment. The greater the exposure
desired, the lower the common denominator.(10)

The messages of our culture are perhaps voiced most strongly and
clearly through music that is subordinated to those messages. The
music is "canned." It is the product of cliches and "hooks"
designed to bring instant response from the listener. As Erik
Routley stated, "All music which self-consciously adopts a style is
like a person who puts on airs. It is affected and
overbearing."(11) This condition is so prevalent in contemporary
music it cannot be overemphasized.

Another concern is found in certain features of what is usually
called "popular culture." Music is a major part of pop culture.
Kenneth Myers, among others, has identified certain culture types
beginning with "high," diminishing to "folk," and plummeting to
"popular." Popular culture "has some serious liabilities that it
has inherited from its origins in distinctively modern, secularized
movements." Generally, these liabilities include "the quest for
novelty, and the desire for instant gratification."(12) In turn,
these same qualities are found in "pop" music.

The quest for novelty is apparent when we understand, as Steve
Lawhead states, that

the whole system feeds on the "new" --new faces, new gimmicks,
new sounds. Yesterday in pop music is not only dead; it is ancient
history.(13)

The desire for instant gratification is the result of the fact
that this type of music is normally produced for commercial
reasons. Continuing, Lawhead writes that

...commercialism, the effective selling of products,
governs every aspect of the popular music industry. From a purely
business point of view, it makes perfect sense to shift the focus
from artistic integrity to some other less rigorous and more easily
managed, non artistic component, such as newness or novelty. Talent
and technical virtuosity take time to develop, and any industry
dependent upon a never-ending stream of fresh faces cannot wait for
talent to emerge.(14)

We do not offer God our best when we employ this approach.
Additionally, we do not honor God when we make the products of such
thinking a consistent part of our lives.